9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (5) TMI 534X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . The penalty could not be deleted merely on the basis of defect pointed by the Ld. AR in the notice and therefore, the legal grounds raised are rejected. We find that the assessee has suffered disallowance u/s 32 against depreciation & u/s 43B due to non-payment of certain interest expenses within stipulated period of time. It is not in dispute that the assessee did not carry out any business activity during the year. It is further noted that the block of asset in the books of accounts did not cease to exist and the assessee has duly explained that the suspension in business was temporary which could not be controverted by the revenue. All these factors gives strength to the various arguments of Ld. AR. So far as addition u/s 43B is con ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... llowances u/s 32 43B vide Assessing Officer [AO] order dated 12/12/2008 which led to initiation of penalty for furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income by issuance of notice u/s 274 read with Section 271(1)(c). Finally, the assessee was saddled with a penalty of ₹ 12,50,056/- against wrong claim of ₹ 37,88,046/- vide penalty order dated 29/06/2009 which was contested without any success before Ld. CIT(A) vide order dated 24/03/2014. Aggrieved, the assessee is in appeal before us. 3. The Ld. Counsel for assessee [AR], while drawing our attention to the documents placed in the paper book, assailed the penalty proceedings on legal ground by contending that the notice issued u/s 274 was defective as only a tick-mark was p ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of the standard printed form was duly ticked by the Ld. AO which shows due application of mind qua penalty proceedings. Mere non-deletion of few words, in our opinion, on the facts of the case, has not caused any prejudiced to the assessee particularly when the penalty proceedings were actively contested by him before the Ld. AO. The assessee, at all times, was aware of the grounds for which he was being penalized. Our conclusion draw support from the provisions of Section 292B also which cures minor defect in the notice provided such notice in substance and effect was in conformity with the intent and purpose of the act. On overall facts and circumstances, we find that such condition was fulfilled in the instant case. We find that the rev ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... reof was allowable to the assessee as per various judicial pronouncements. Further, the assessee suffered another disallowance u/s 43B only due to non-payment thereof within the stipulated time period. However, the nature or quantum of the same was never in dispute and the assessee, following mercantile system of accounting, was quite eligible to debit the same in the Profit Loss Account and therefore, no penalty against such disallowance could be imposed as per the decision of Hon ble Madras High Court in CIT Vs. MSK Constructions (P) Ltd. [296 ITR 18]. Our attention was further drawn to the fact that the assessee incurred huge losses during the impugned AY but the same could not be carried forward by him in the next AY in view of the fa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
